About the B-plot of Real Life, Tom shows that the only way to live is to dive into the chaos (of real life.) The B-plot is a sort of antiparallel to the A-plot, in that the Doctor doesn't make Paris' choice naturally but has to be taught. It's technically two different plots, but one theme. I thought the sitcom nature of the scenario was perfectly absurd in any time other than US Fifties TV. Personal jeopardy to Tom had no resonance, as a star, he was guaranteed survival.

But it was so obviously the tacked on sideplot required to make the show more "sci-fi" like they did back in the earlier days. It was just a horrible sideplot very tenuously connected to the main plot, all they did was spout technobabble about some random anomaly of the week™ for most of it, its unbearably bad to watch.

stj wrote:

The absurd growing backwards premise of Innocence, which was low rated, was a metaphor for how we all face death as children

What? We do?

stj wrote:

The A-plot of The Swarm was supposed to show that some enemy aggressions were too outrageous to go unopposed, even if violence was in the end justified.

You're trolling now right? Do you really honestly believe every plot has some big meaning to it? I'm pretty sure a lot of them are just done because it sounds like a fun sci-fi concept.